Memeorandum

February 21, 2019

Better Gun Law Enforcement, And Better Fact-Checking

Inspired by the recent Aurora IL shooting the NY Times takes a fair and balanced look at the recurring problem that our existing gun laws are not enforced. We learn that safety is neither safe nor cheap:

Still, only eight states have laws that provide an explicit mechanism so that people suspected of having guns in violation of those prohibitions are actually required to give them up. And some of those states merely allow — but do not require — the police to seek a court order to confiscate such guns.

That was the case in Illinois, where the authorities knew for more than four years that Gary Martin was a violent felon but apparently did nothing to ensure that he surrendered the laser-sighted Smith & Wesson handgun that he used to kill five co-workers in Aurora, Ill., on Friday.

...

Unlike Illinois, most states do not have an explicit process allowing the police a way to confiscate guns from people suspected of being prohibited owners. But even in those states that do, two factors explain why many police and sheriff’s departments use these laws so infrequently: time and danger.

“That’s a challenging situation for law enforcement to knock on a door and say, ‘Hey, we’re here to take your guns, Mr. Dangerous Criminal,’” said Adam Skaggs, chief counsel of the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, which advocates tighter gun laws.

Well, yes, police work can be dangerous. Showing up after a shooting is not so threatening physically, but then again, showing up with a shooting is also dangerous - six officers were injured in the Aurora shoot-out, so danger deferred is not always danger denied.

As to budgets:

But when Illinois lawmakers sought to tighten state law so that the police would be mandated to confiscate guns owned by people barred from possessing them, or at least verify that the guns had been transferred to legal owners, concerns about manpower helped doom the proposal.

“Law enforcement didn’t object to the essence of the law,” but said they would need far more money to carry it out, said State Representative Kathleen Willis, a Democrat from suburban Chicago who is pushing to toughen the law.

Freedom isn't free and safety isn't cheap.

And, on to a fact-check. This one becomes Blue-on-Blue. The Times quotes a Brady spokesperson:

One in five gun purchases is estimated to occur with no background check, such as through sales over the internet or at gun shows, said Kris Brown, president of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence. That attracts buyers who would fail a check.

“You’d have to assume that if you are a prohibited purchaser, you are aware of that loophole, and that’s how you’re going to get a gun,” Ms. Brown said.

Do note the word "purchases", which ought to be "transfers". Here is the 2017 study, but Politifact has already tackled this:

The fact checks, and experts we contacted, instead cited a study authored by researchers from Northeastern and Harvard universities that was published in January 2017. They did an online survey, in 2015, of 1,613 adult gun owners.

Among gun owners who said they obtained their most recent gun within the two previous years:

22 percent overall said they obtained the guns without a background check. But that includes guns that were purchased or received in another way, such as through a gift or an inheritance.

13 percent who purchased firearms -- for example, from a friend or online -- said they had done so without a background check.

The lower figure applies here, given that Bullock’s claim is about gun sales.

Blue-on-blue. And let's note that the unchecked purchases includes family, friends and acquaintances as well as gun shows and online. In fact, a quick glance at the relevant table tells me that family, friends and acquaintance transfers outnumber the online and gun show transfers. Of course, thugs and nut jobs have friends and family too.

As to the infamous gun show loophole, per this survey, 4% of transfers in the past two years were at gun shows, with no one claiming to gave avoided a background check. Not exactly the point the Brady person made.

"If you notice a lot more trolls on social media re: politics, it's [because] Mitch McConnell's former Chief of Staff helps run a multimillion dollar operation to have bot accounts manipulate online discourse," Ocasio-Cortez wrote on Twitter

"Mr. Smollett is a young man of impeccable character and integrity who fiercely and solemnly maintains his innocence betrayed by a system that apparently wants to skip due process and proceed directly to sentencing.”

That shit isn't going to work, but the attorneys can empty his bank account at a rapid pace:)

I was with Conrad Black right up to his first sentence of his final paragraph:

"Without realizing the proportions of the emergency, America has survived the greatest constitutional crisis since the Civil War."

I think the jury is still out on that and we will not like the verdict if the two tiered system of justice is seen to survive much longer. At the moment it is alive and well, and there is no visible evidence that it is changing.

Paul Manafort Could Face New York Charges If Trump Pardons Him - Bloomberg

New York state prosecutors have put together a criminal case against Paul Manafort that they could file quickly if the former chairman of Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign receives a presidential pardon.

New York County District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. is ready to file an array of tax and other charges against Manafort, according to two people familiar with the matter, something seen as an insurance policy should the president exercise his power to free the former aide. Skirting laws that protect defendants from being charged twice for the same offense has been one of Vance’s challenges.

Now that I've completed it and about to return to the library, let me confirm a recommendation for the non fiction science book What A Plant Knows by Dan Chamovitz.
Written for us amateurs, digests the latest in research of what plants perceive and the mechanics of how perception is translated into action.
A fast moving field of research

The Hill piece on Kraft is shameful. First the headline is that Kraft is "charged in a prostitution ring," which sounds a lot worse than just solicitation. Then the lead paragraph is "Robert Kraft, a long-time friend of President Trump and owner of the New England Patriots, faces charges in a prostitution sting...."

So "ring" gets changed to "sting," but of course the important thing is to link him to Trump.

As near as I can find there are 235 Democrats in the US House. If 223 have signed a statement saying they care more about illegals than Americans; that must mean that only 12 care about legal Americans over illegals.

I believe Goodell could be involved.
Next move is to take the franchise away from him.
George WBush acted admirably after 9/11.
No problem with security initiated or establishment of Homeland Security.
Conrad Black Article is top notch.
We have to hold the criminals accountable.
Otherwise, we will have a weekly Jussie Smollett event with the next wannabe going for his 15 minutes of fame.
Glad Smollett is eliminated from the last 2 episodes of Empire.
Immediate consequences are the only way drugproblemed individuals learn a valuable lesson.
Lying and accusing others of heinous crimes has steep consequences for you.

My ex used to run a daycare in our home (she still does, only it's now my ex home), and would get occasional visits by state inspectors. It's no problem, they just make sure the adults are really there in the allowed kid/adult ratios, numbers of kids don't exceed the allowed max, place looks safe and and kids look like they're being taken care of ok. If they didn't do this, lots of home daycares would surely break the rules with some ill effects. I don't see why it's a problem for home schooling.